Lord Doherty said he would not rule definitively that the prime minister had the powers to ask the Queen to prorogue parliament until a full hearing of the case, which he brought forward to Tuesday next week.

He rejected an application from lawyers acting for 75 anti-Brexit MPs and peers for an emergency interdict, or injunction, requiring Johnson to suspend the prorogation.

In a surprise development, Aidan O’Neill QC, the lawyer acting for the MPs and peers, called in court for Johnson to provide a sworn affidavit under oath setting out why he needed to prorogue parliament.

O’Neill also said he reserved the right to call Johnson to give evidence in court at a later date.

Joanna Cherry QC, the Scottish National party MP who is leading the legal challenge, urged the prime minister to provide a statement. “Tell the court the truth in sworn testimony,” Cherry said outside court. “[If] he believes that he has a good case for prorogation, he should have the guts to swear an affidavit.”

She said an off-guard disclosure by Ben Wallace, the defence secretary, caught on microphone on Thursday, that prorogation was a political gambit to frustrate anti-Brexit MPs in parliament was powerful evidence in their favour.

Doherty said he saw no urgent need for a temporary interdict ordering Johnson to drop prorogation at this stage but he agreed that the full case needed to be heard urgently.

Q&A

What does 'prorogue parliament' mean?

Show Hide

Prorogation is the official term that marks the end of a parliamentary session. After being advised to do so by the prime minister, the Queen formally prorogues parliament. This takes the form of an announcement in the House of Lords on the Queen’s behalf. It is a speech, written by the government, which usually describes the bills that have been passed during that session and summarises what has been achieved.

It means that all work on existing legislation stops, and MPs and Lords stop sitting. Prorogation also automatically kills any bills, early day motions or questions to ministers going through parliament.

Parliament can then be reopened a few days later with a fresh slate of legislation intentions, set out in a new Queen’s speech at the formal state opening of parliament.

Was this helpful?

Thank you for your feedback.

The full legal challenge, tabled last month before Johnson announced this week that he would suspend parliament, was originally due to be heard next Friday.

“I’m not satisfied that it has been demonstrated that there’s a need for an interim suspension or an interim interdict to be granted at this stage,” he said. “I’m going to move the substantive hearing forward to Tuesday. Weighing consideration in the balance, it’s in the interest of justice and in the public interest that it proceeds sooner rather than later.”

O’Neill had urged Doherty to reject claims from the UK government’s lawyers, Roddy Dunlop QC and Andrew Webster QC, that the hearings may need to take place on other days because a hearing on Tuesday clashed with other cases.

“There’s an urgency to this. Any delay of any sort is potentially fundamentally prejudicial, not simply to the interests of the petitioners but to the country as a whole.”

The UK government faces parallel legal actions by anti-Brexit campaigners in London and Belfast.

A government spokeswoman said: “As we have set out, the government needs to bring forward a strong domestic legislative agenda, and MPs are not prevented from scrutinising our withdrawal from the EU.

“We are glad the court found against the interdict. There was no good reason to seek one, given the full hearing is due to take place next week and the process of bringing the session to an end will not start until the week commencing 9 September.”

Cherry said she was happy the case had been expedited. “I see that as a victory for us,” she said. “He has said there is no urgency over the weekend, because of course the order which came from Balmoral on Wednesday says parliament cannot be prorogued before 9 September.”

The Labour MP Ian Murray, who is backing the legal action, said: “This verdict means a full hearing has been fast-tracked to next week, which is now the most important week in modern British history.

“It is disappointing that we have to go to the courts to protect British democracy, but Boris Johnson’s attempt to silence the people’s representatives cannot go unchallenged. As well as this legal battle in the court of session, the campaign against a no-deal Brexit will also take place in the House of Commons.”

The ruling came as a similar application for an emergency injunction in Belfast’s high court on the grounds was put back until next week when the judge sees parliament’s response to Boris Johnson’s decision.

“Every morning you wake up and there’s something new that has occurred here,” Northern Ireland’s lord chief justice Sir Declan Morgan said during Friday’s short hearing in Belfast.

Lawyers for campaigner Raymond McCord, who is taking the action, were told to file papers by the end of play Monday in readiness for a full hearing no later than Friday next week.